§ discipline
‹ Browse decisions

Mark St John Morris

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number11451/2015
Date01/01/2015
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Breaches, Client Money, Failures, Solicitors' Accounts Rules

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 14,500
Dishonesty foundYes

Sole practitioner Mark St John Morris admitted all allegations, including dishonesty, relating to improper withdrawals of client money from his firm's client account to pay firm creditors (notably the firm's landlord) and to avoid exceeding the office account overdraft limit. This included a £9,235 transfer (21 July 2010, not replaced for 19 weeks), a £2,930.32 transfer (3 April 2013, not replaced for 11 weeks), and 36 further improper withdrawals totalling £19,645.83 between January 2011 and April 2014. He also failed to keep the client cash account written up and failed to carry out reconciliations. The Tribunal applied the Twinsectra test and found dishonesty proved. With no exceptional circumstances, he was struck off the Roll and ordered to pay agreed costs of £14,500.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Made misleading statements to the Investigation Officer and in his first witness statement (falsely claiming a banking error)
  • Conduct was dishonest
  • Conduct was repeated over a prolonged period
  • Client funds were not replaced promptly
  • Respondent was senior and experienced and knew or ought to have known conduct breached obligations

Mitigating factors:

  • Client funds were eventually replaced (albeit weeks later)
  • Made admissions and showed insight, albeit at a late stage
  • Showed remorse and apologised
  • Previously long-standing unblemished career
  • Good character references
  • No actual loss to any client
  • Orderly winding up of business, corrected client balances and put run-off cover in place

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/11451/